Sunday, April 18, 2010

Illegals to get free health care after amnesty

On Saturday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told a Las Vegas audience: "We are going to pass comprehensive immigration reform" this year -- using the "comprehensive" buzzword that everyone knows means amnesty for the 10.8 million or more illegal aliens now in the country.

But that amnesty means even more than it used to -- because Democrats this year broke with long-standing precedent to ensure that, if legalized, these aliens would immediately qualify for ObamaCare's health-insurance subsidies.

In 1996, Congress added teeth to the "public charge" doctrine by imposing a five-year bar on legal aliens receiving federal means-tested public benefits. In other words, no feeding at the public trough until you've been supporting yourself for five years. But now Democrats have eliminated the five-year bar with respect to the new health-care benefits.

The new law's authors plainly realized this wouldn't be popular. While the House health-care bill stated quite plainly that the five-year bar did not apply, the Senate version that became law did it via a torturous process that involved defining the health-care subsidy as a "tax credit" (though it's available even to people who don't pay taxes) and declaring that a lawfully present alien who's not eligible for Medicaid (because of the five-year bar) is eligible for a health-care "tax credit."

Why sneak such a provision into the law, when it goes against the sound economics of the public-charge doctrine and further burdens American taxpayers?

Perhaps to create a long-term constituency for ObamaCare.

This hidden time bomb in the ObamaCare law was buried deeply and with deliberation. But when it explodes, the American taxpayer will feel the blast: Adding 10.8 million largely low-income people to those covered by the health "reform" will further explode the cost of an already unaffordable measure.

64 comments:

A Taxpaying Citizen
said...

"None of this concerns Gary Ackerman."

How out of touch can that man be? That issue may not be a concern to Ackerman himself but it really is a concern to his constituents. Not only that, he will have to explain his role in allowing a local election to get out of hand. The concerns started with a controversial headline in a newspaper that he partially owns to favor a candidate who worked for him.

Then he will have to explain his relationship to the Zises family and how reaped huge financial benefits from these people. Did he abuse his role in Congress for personal gains and to favor his friends?

Finally, he will have to explain to the electorate how it is right for taxpayers, who are already heavily burdened, to pay for healthcare of those who came to our shores without permission. Great Ackerman Asshole, you are so arrogant that your downfall is imminent!!!

I always voted Democrat because of social issues like abortion and gay marriage, but probably would vote Republican if they didn't take such a strong and hateful stance against issues like that.

But I am getting fed up with immigration reform regarding illegals. I told my wife that if something like this passes, I would never vote for a Democrat again. She said that if I really felt like that I should tell these politicians.

She also wondered if this meant that these people would now have to pay taxes or anything like that in which they would also be responsible. I thought they'd still be so poor that they'd easily get welfare in any of its forms.

This ass and his all his possie get the boot in November.Make no doubt these bastards will try and ram this through just like the health care bill before they leave office.They see it as a last "legacy" thats how these twee twat lovers think

You should have given up on the Dems a long time ago, especially because most NYC Republicans don't give a rat's ass for the social issues you mentioned. You want gay marriage? Then vote out the 6 Dems that voted against it. You want abortion? You already have it. You want fiscal sanity? Vote Republican - or at least vote out incumbent Dems like ackerman.

McCain and the Moron took the exact SAME STAND on immigration reform as the Dems - BOTH parties were for granting amnesty.

The reason is a simple one really - it is more humane. They are here. NO ONE - and most definitely not the Republicans amongst us - are reporting them so deportations are rare unless they are involved in criminal activity.

The thing to do was to SEAL our borders - especially during the Bush Administration when so very many gained access - probably because there are those in America who WANT them here since they will perform slave labor.

So - what to do with them - Denying them health care PUTS US AT RISK - we cannot have people in our society with untreated diseases or children that are not immunized.

Anonymous - "it wont be free. they will have to pay for it once they get citizenship. There is a bit of upside to it...not much, but a bit"

of course - uh ohhhh! If they have to PAY FOR it - the Repuks who hire them and pay them slave labor with have to INCREASE THEIR SALARIES in order for them to pay -hmmmm my crystal ball tells me that there will be LESS immigrates in the very near future.

Why can't we do that? I believe it's simple because we WON'T. Their cheap labor is too important to too many American businesses.

It is against the law for any hospital to turn away patients - but, on-going treatment such as chemo is given ONLY to those with insurance (or paid for of course). Even those with the BEST of insurance coverage is NOT covered many times for all the rounds of Chemo.

Our current health care system is inhumane towards US - Americans WITH coverage no less those who do not have it.

Republicans don't care about anyone else expect themselves - that's your m.o. Care then about the risk they bring to US by not getting treated for AIDS, certain viruses,etc. If their children are not immunized - OUR children face risk.

of course - uh ohhhh! If they have to PAY FOR it - the Repuks who hire them and pay them slave labor with have to INCREASE THEIR SALARIES in order for them to pay -hmmmm my crystal ball tells me that there will be LESS immigrates in the very near future.

yes, thats the pt I was making. granted I bet half will pass go, directly to welfare, but the rest may suddenly realize it makes no sense to work and actually go back from whence they came- taxes SUCK!Someone illegal making $18k a yr w/o being taxed (other than sales tax) makes about the same as some poor schmuck making $30k being taxed. Why stay if you actually have to start paying into a system youve been gaming...well, forever?

NYC Republicans dont give a rat's ass about anything remotely Republican. Bloomberg wins as as Repub, says screw you to Repubs, courts Obama, Repubs welcome him back. NYC Republican? There is no such thing.

"Someone illegal making $18k a yr w/o being taxed (other than sales tax) makes about the same as some poor schmuck making $30k being taxed. Why stay if you actually have to start paying into a system youve been gaming...well, forever?"

"Amnesty was defeated by the concerted effort of conservatives, in spite of McCain and Bush."

That was then - now the Conservatives are welcoming amnesty for the illegals saying that a good Christian supports amnesty - which is true actually - BUT I don't trust the Conservatives - I believe they KNOW that the illegals are as religious as they are - more support for their churches - and the ultimate cause - the "holy war" they've been hoping for.

"now the Conservatives are welcoming amnesty for the illegals saying that a good Christian supports amnesty - which is true actually"

No offense Babs, but you are PROFOUNDLY mistaken if you really believe conservatives support amnesty. I ask you, if liberals support amnesty (that is a given), moderates support amnesty (Sens like McCain and Graham) and as you claim, conservatives (I'd like to see one example of a true conservative) support amnesty, then, then where is amnesty? Where is the opposition? Why not a slam dunk for the administration?

I have quoted and linked the article I read recently about this - I think you are right BUT those that are the more religious in your party are in favor of amnesty - or so the article states anyway. Don't forget the Evangelicals.

Also - the majority of the illegals become legal - it is a goal of theirs to better their lives and the lives of their children. Amnesty will encourage those efforts by making the process easier and take away the fear factor for them.

Here's the aricle:

"A different twist was added to the turbulent immigration reform debate this week. In a conference call with reporters, a network of conservative political activists and evangelical church leaders announced a campaign to push for the legalization of millions of undocumented people in the United States.

“From reading the news, you’d think all conservatives are against the issue, but we know different,”

No offense, Babs, but citing an editorial from a left wing site from Salem, Oregon doesnt really bolster your point. There was a big push for amnesty at the tail end of the Bush admin, and conservatives fought hard against it. Moderate Repubs supported it. Liberals supported it. The Prez supported it. Congressional Dems supported it. Sens. Inhofe, Demint, Brownback et al., National Review, Human Events, Powerline blog, Michelle Malkin, George Will, Krauthammer, the National Review, the Heritage Foundation, and on and on were against it. It was defeated. A citation of unnamed 'conservatives' is not convincing.

Also - the majority of the illegals become legal - it is a goal of theirs to better their lives and the lives of their children.

Yes, by bringing their aunts, uncles, cousins, second cousins, and anyone else remotely related to the United States ASAP. Immediately sign them up for the full gamut of social services, and make sure they get their God given "rights" under affirmative action!

Amnesty will encourage those efforts by making the process easier and take away the fear factor for them.

Yes, we don't want illegals to be fearful any more, now do we? That should be our first priority as a country, rather than say - creating employment for those who already ARE citizens!

It's better that our legal U.S. citizens remain unemployed, then for our saintly illegals to live in fear!

you don't want to believe that not ALL conservatives are against amnesty - fine - time will tell more.

In any event - the illegals do not get sent back because they have been protected by their employers who need them to enrich their own lives - so please don't blame Liberals - we don't treat people like slaves.

Boy you people are really something. Don't you get it? The whole system is a sham and the Democrats and Republicans are really on the same team. I fail to see how the taxpayers are protected from predatory banks that are charging 30% interest while using the money from your taxes to benefit themselves. Bottom line? Get down to basics and promote the values that made this country great in the first place. And oh yeah...CLOSE THE FRIGGIN' BORDERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The South indeed started to vote increasingly Republican after 1964. However, political scientists Richard Johnston and Byron Schafer have argued that this development was based more on economics than on race.

But no, let's pretend it was race even though Republicans overwhelmingly voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Look up the vote tallies if you don't believe me.

Under the law, wouldn't this be aiding and abetting? These illegals are criminals and if they get amnesty, that would be a crime. Why should we pay for them? The Federal Government won't secure our borders. Why are we being punished because they won't do their job?

this week, Gary Ackerman sent me an eight page mailing ( paid by taxpayers) titled "HEALTH CARE: THE NEW LAW". he stated that 46 million citizens would now be insured. no illegal immigrants would be included.initially the pro-Obamacare advocates said 34 million is the correct number. after the 11 to 13 million illegalaliens somehow were included. today Ackerman admits the number is 46 million.the big lie is exposed. he knows that amnesty for 13 million illegal aliens is the next democrat quest in D.C.

i returned his mailing to sender and requested my name to be removed from his list.i also attached a copy of the N.Y.Post photo of 4/16/10 ,"N.Y. IS TEA PARTY COUNTRY".i added that, with your vote ,$500 billion was cut in medicare benefits for senior citizens. he now owns the multi-billion dollar future tax increase that citizens will have to pay. GOOD BYE GARY.nyc area taxpayers protested at RIVERHEAD,HAUPPAUGE AND HICKSVILLE,L.I. also at 32street/8th avenue in nyc. i joined the close to 1000 peaceful citizens at Hicksville. there was NO COVERAGE BY THE L.I.NEWSDAY. what are they hiding ?if anyone wants info on future protests, i collected website literature .

"But no, let's pretend it was race even though Republicans overwhelmingly voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Look up the vote tallies if you don't believe me."

You're not getting the last word.

I'm obviously not expressing myself correctly since you are not understanding me.

You are ignoring the distinct split between Northern and Southern politicians on the issue. When this is taken into account, the facts show that in both the North and the South, Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act at a higher rate than the Republicans.

Put it this way - if you were a Southern Dem who was a descendent of a slave owner and raised with certain beliefs of entitlement and class distinction - AND everything around you separated you from THEM - chances are you were NOT going to be too happy with the Civil Rights Act.

It was the Kennedy and Johnson ADMINISTRATION that choregraphed the passing civil rights act.

Republican presidential candidate in 1964 Goldwater OPPOSED the act.

You're looking too simplistically at that era. It was not all black and white (pun intended).

i have copies of the Ackerman Health care law. he mailed them to his constituents,(at taxpayer cost of course.)

beware babeling babs. some of us actually spent time in the South from 1952-present. many myths concocted by your fellow travelers can be proven as propaganda, from the marxists.

many negro family's homes were side by side with the white Southern families.my navy radar school class "A" shipmates (negro),existed, while the commies told you that the navy was segregated. i have photos for proof.

the negroes in S.Carolina public schools,although segregated, by law at the time, far exceeded the test scores and graduation numbers, since forced integration was implemented in the early 1970's.forced busing for integration because of color was ruled unconstitutional in 2007 by the Supreme Court.Billions and billions of tax dollars were wasted on the failed busing for integration schemes by the commie driven civil rights groups. the term 'RACIST" got all to come aboard,even though the states were being fleeced of tax dollars. is it DE JA VU in 2010?

Really? Remind me again what political party did most of the slave holders in the South belong to?

What political party did most of the founders of the Ku Klux Klan belong to?

Check your facts, Bubs.

Or maybe check out your medical marijuana prescription, it might be too strong for you.

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Looks like more of that hysterical nonsense from the right with their re writing of history.

So tell me about Strom Thurmond there guy and about Jesse Helms, Trent Lott, and the Council of Conservative citizen's. All Republicans with blatant ties to the KKK. Also J. Edgar Hoover the staunch conservative spent every waking moment trying to smear civil rights leaders, especially Dr. Martin Luther King with COINTELPRO with agent provocateurs. The most outrageous, proven action undertaken by Hoovers FBI against Dr. King was the 1964 letter to King, purporting to be from a black leader, urging King to kill himself under the blackmail threat that compromising tape recordings of himself would be made public.

And Fed has it correct that parties are controlled by larger the same Council on Foreign relations strings.Notice how many candidates dropped out of the presidential race? The right wing authoritarian CFR chose Cheney Bush (Cheney is on the board of the CFR) and they chose Obama.

Also bloomberg defunding public schools and pushing for charter schools is a classic conservative move as well as his No Child left behind mentality towards schools from the last president who couldnt speak or even finish his military service.

"I never said ALL conservatives are against amnesty, just a vast majority. You have claimed that conservatives support amnesty without citing a single conservative name."

Yeah - ya' did Mr. Strawman.

You do not have a comprehension of concepts - you are not an abstract thinker. PERCENTAGES are MEANINGLESS to our argument since all the politics and policies of the political parties CHANGED from the 1960s.

Al is beneficiary of OCCIDENTAL OIL (a company in the UNION OF SOCIALIST SOVIET RUSSIA),stocks.his father was a fellow traveler of ARMAND HAMMER,who was JOE STALIN'S comrade. you remember STALIN,who is responsible for the murder of 30million Russian citizens in the 1930's -40's.his communist/marxist party provoked the "COLD WAR",built the Berlin Wall and russian pilots who flew fighter planes against the U.S.airforce during the Korean War in 1950-53.N.korea invaded S.korea.

re:lino,the liberal,(possibly marxist advocate),from wikipedia :"after the russian revolution a part of the socialist labor party,under JULIUS HAMMER'S(Armands father) leadership split off to become a founding element of the COMMUNIST PARTY U.S.A. later in life, Hammer would admit the COMMUNIST TIE HIMSELF "

To "anon": You haven't gotten the hang of this reading comprehension thing..have you..

Quoting from the Wiki piece:

"Politically, Hammer was a staunch supporter of the Republican party. He boosted Richard Nixon's presidential campaign with $54,000 in campaign contributions. He was convicted on charges that one of these donations had been made illegally, but was later pardoned by Republican U.S. President George H. W. Bush."

Pepsico, Coca-cola, Caterpillar Tractor (among others) all had long ties to the soviets, McDonalds too. Are they "commies"?

See how following those slanted-dumb talk shows makes you look stupid?

Akerman recently wrote a letter to residents regarding the poor returns of census forms representing 51% of the population. Did he not figure out by now that the 49% of the census forms not returned were illegals or folks hiding from the government oversight?

Spotted a piece of Queens Crap in your community?

Please note

Italicized passages and many of the photos come from other websites. The links to these websites are provided within the posts.

Why your neighborhood is full of Queens Crap

"The difference between dishonest and honest graft: for dishonest graft one worked solely for one's own interests, while for honest graft one pursued the interests of one's party, one's state, and one's personal interests all together." - George Washington Plunkitt

Sites that kick ass:

The above organizations are recognized by Queens Crap as being beneficial to the city as a whole, by fighting to preserve the history and character of our neighborhoods. They are not connected to this website and the opinions presented here do not necessarily represent the positions of these organizations.

The comments left by posters to this site do not necessarily represent the views of the blogger or webmaster.